The PCNation

We could solve everything like pokemon players. We could pick candidates via votes then have the battle it out on pokemon showdown with the rest of the community watching and then we decide everything based on how they battle. (Mostly that was joking around if we tried that I think chaos would ensue)

Actually I think we should do exactly what we do in the usa to elect our president (except without fixed voting and everyone can vote) However the people elected do what the community wants and not violate rights or anything like that. We should decide this every year at the beginning of the year.
 
Thepowaofhax said:
Your anarcho-capitalism will be the most likely government if a Kakistocracy would happen either by rebellion or by policy.


Vote for me and the Kakistocracy will rise.
Click to expand...

Vote for a statist? No thank you.

Just kidding lol. Technically Im a statist. Im Libertarian, not Anarcho-Capitilist, though ancap is a form of Libertarianism. Im borderline minarchist/voluntaryist. I dont want police run by government, but I do believe government should run courts. Look the post, it clearly states I want a SMALL government, not no government haha.

For the sake of having fun, maybe I will vote for your Kakistocracy cause Im Bad hehehe!
 
I believe we should vote to elect a prime minister of PC Nation. All running candidates may appoint themselves into the race. Candidates should build their platform based on what they believe. If that means they want to run the nation into an anarchy with no consequence, so be it. It will have been the people's vote.

Question is: will it be a first-past-the-post victory? Or perhaps proportional representation? Either of these imply a congress of governors which I believe is best for fair, well debated policy-making.

To first choose a head of nation I think we should use the first-past-the-post system. That will represent, by majority, how the citizens of PC Nation think it should be governed. To be clear, the candidate must not advocate for first-past-the-post systems, or any democratic way of governing by any means. If the citizens of PC Nation believe a dictatorship is most appropriate - so be it.

I hereby announce my candidacy for Prime Minister of PC Nation. My platform will be built around free speech for all. Poop talk is encouraged. Knowing your enemy means you know yourself, and thus know your friends even more. Citizens are free to criticize the government as much as necessary. Transparency in the government will be a top priority. We will be a nation of strong, opinionated posters. We will build our own cultures amongst ourselves. We will be strong with each other, towards each other. Vote for marz.
 
Lets kill the head of the governing body
 
Most of us seem to at least want some form of vaguely democratic government it seems. I will say though, I think the government definitely should be running/funding things like the police, firefighters etc. Privatisation is the devil and it almost always leaves the poor in a very bad position where they can't have access to services they desperately need because they can't afford to pay for them. To that end I don't think anything resembling this kakistocracy, voluntarism or an oligarchy is a good idea.

Aside from not wanting any sort of oligarchical government, I want to add that I don't think the size of our government is a particularly large issue. A government does not need to be large to accurately represent the people - although it does help produce a more varied number of opinions - it just needs to be elected. I suggest we keep the government of a more moderate size.

A big question for me now is the distribution of resources. A lot of you do seem to be leaning towards more capitalist views but I would advocate we take a look at socialist or even communist ideals so resources are shared fairly and there is less of a social divide in our nation.

Also, let's remember we aren't electing a leader right now and this has nothing to do with anything on PC. :)
 
Why aren't we electing anyone? Sure, we can chit chat about what we'd like ideally, but it seems like what we need most is a leader. Someone that will instil laws and regulations as opposed to hypothetical debate. Our people are starving. We need laws now.
 
marz said:
Why aren't we electing anyone? Sure, we can chit chat about what we'd like ideally, but it seems like what we need most is a leader. Someone that will instil laws and regulations as opposed to hypothetical debate. Our people are starving. We need laws now.
Click to expand...

Because there's no point electing anyone when we don't even have a system of government or a constitution.
 
gimmepie said:
Because there's no point electing anyone when we don't even have a system of government or a constitution.
Click to expand...

You're wrong. Electing someone would instil a government, way of governing and constitution.
 
gimmepie said:
and would then quickly turn into a dictatorship when the elected person could do whatever they want.
Click to expand...

you have no faith in our citizens. this mentality reflects badly on how you would act with power....
 
marz said:
you have no faith in our citizens. this mentality reflects badly on how you would act with power....
Click to expand...

Everyone is destined to do badly in power; the only good government will degenerate into that of the great and glorious Kakistocracy. Therefore, we shall start with the worse governmental type. Faster degeneration = better outcome from rebellions.

I say we become a Communist state, following the great and glorious Komяade Ста́лин!
 
LOL marz, you really have the nerve to just tell someone they're wrong don't you?

What does it mean to elect someone if there's no constitution to tell us what elections mean? To what position are we electing them? What powers do they have? What does their authority represent? You need a constitution which spells all that out.
 
BadSheep said:
Vote for a statist? No thank you.

Just kidding lol. Technically Im a statist. Im Libertarian, not Anarcho-Capitilist, though ancap is a form of Libertarianism. Im borderline minarchist/voluntaryist. I dont want police run by government, but I do believe government should run courts. Look the post, it clearly states I want a SMALL government, not no government haha.

For the sake of having fun, maybe I will vote for your Kakistocracy cause Im Bad hehehe!
Click to expand...

I choose small government too. Or maybe Libertarian socialism like Sun mentioned (it's socialism without the big government...it could please Gimmiepie and those of us who are more small government. Of course it's only a theory...it hasn't been tried that I'm aware of).

(This one later one is more for fun, it's not my real beliefs unlike the first one). How about a society in which the oldest rule over the young? The older you get the smarter you are, right?
 
OmegaRuby and AlphaSapphire said:
I choose small government too. Or maybe Libertarian socialism like Sun mentioned (it's socialism without the big government...it could please Gimmiepie and those of us who are more small government. Of course it's only a theory...it hasn't been tried that I'm aware of).
Click to expand...

Socialism, even if it allows all personal freedoms, including no gun control, still restricts our freedom economically. Not to mention, the taxation is theft because there is no reason why my taxes should be going to other people unless I voluntarily donate. In addition, communism/socialism has never been implemented correctly. Personal freedoms coincide with economic freedoms, so when the economic freedoms are taken away, the personal freedoms generally do as well.
 
Now, on a more serious note, I believe a Democratic Republic, and with the system, regulated Capitalism should be the best type of government. For those un-employed, we can add a welfare and food stamps program as long as they're trying to find a job. If they do not find a job or have no intentions to do so, they should not get any benefits.

For our education system, should we do public or private? Public allows for everyone to be educated, but it will be valued less from the students, but private is more expensive and the students will value it as if they fail, they dun' goof'd.
 
BadSheep said:
Socialism, even if it allows all personal freedoms, including no gun control, still restricts our freedom economically. Not to mention, the taxation is theft because there is no reason why my taxes should be going to other people unless I voluntarily donate. In addition, communism/socialism has never been implemented correctly. Personal freedoms coincide with economic freedoms, so when the economic freedoms are taken away, the personal freedoms generally do as well.
Click to expand...

Good point. Though Libertarian socialism relies more of volunteeringly giving taxes...seems like it would fail though...
I guess Liberation capitalism with checks to protect people from abuse would be best.
 
BadSheep said:
Socialism, even if it allows all personal freedoms, including no gun control, still restricts our freedom economically. Not to mention, the taxation is theft because there is no reason why my taxes should be going to other people unless I voluntarily donate. In addition, communism/socialism has never been implemented correctly. Personal freedoms coincide with economic freedoms, so when the economic freedoms are taken away, the personal freedoms generally do as well.
Click to expand...

But if you believe that tax should only be voluntarily donated, then you do not deserve to live in any state that requires taxation, for that would mean you would be getting some benefiting without otherwise having contributed to it. And a state without taxation is hardly a state, since states need resources to do the things they do, and I think that would be very difficult to build up resources with a voluntary system.

Socialism has been implemented in many countries. Plenty of places around the world have social redistribution programs and collective ownership of certain industries and national resources. So to say that socialism has never been implemented correctly is highly misleading.

Anyways, what do you mean by economic freedoms? And what do you mean by:

Personal freedoms coincide with economic freedoms, so when the economic freedoms are taken away, the personal freedoms generally do as well.
Click to expand...

Are you suggesting if the state makes it harder for you to open a business, they're going to take away your right to vote next? That seems rather silly. I don't know if the connection that you're talking about actually exists in real life.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top